Archive

Food Rules

Education?

October 26, 2012
Children, Food Descriptives, Food Environment, Food Rules, Scientific Studies
Leave a Comment

We are all shaped by our environment, we are products of the world around us. The people we spend time with, talk to, seek opinions of. They influence us. The places we travel to, the new perspective of environment changes us. Many see this in a large context but struggle with it in the personal. The most important factor in student learning? The teacher in front of the room. Why? They create the environment for learning, or not learning. Why do parents sweat over school and teacher choice? We know that these choices have impact. Has the environment of standardized testing in primary and secondary schools changed education? You betcha. (I’m Minnesotan). Yet when it comes to food and environmental change we struggle. It’s personal in a different way. Be it socially, intellectually, emotionally, politically, foodily, we are a reflection of the place that surrounds us.

From Jane Brody’s recent piece in the New York Times on environment and sweetened beverages:

“Children in the United States consume on average three times as many calories from sugar sweetened beverages compared to Dutch children.”

Care to guess how the bodyweight and BMI of children in the U.S. compares to those in the Netherlands?

“Sugar sweetened drinks, the single largest source of calories in our diet, account for nearly half of the total added sugars we consume and 7 percent of our total calories – nearly 15% in some groups, including adolescent boys….the average student consumes 31 pounds of sugar in sweetened beverages annually.”

31 pounds of sugar in beverages alone. That is not counting all the other food. In a recent study young women who consumed one or more sweetened beverages per day doubled their risk of developing type II diabetes compared to women who drank one per month. A fascinating tidbit here, women who consumed sugar sweetened beverages increased their caloric consumption form other foods throughout the day. That’s right, they ate more as a result of the soda. Not only did they not account for the calories in the drink, they went and ate even more. The authors speculate that sugar sweetened beverages may “induce hunger and food intake.”

Anybody want to argue the power of food environments? I’m ready anytime. Ms. Brody points out that there are numerous individuals in New York City who are still fuming about the drink size regulations recently passed there, arguing that change should come about through only educational efforts. Why didn’t I think of that? Teaching would be so much easier. All I need to do is stand up in front of my classes and tell them what to know and they’ll know it. Even better, simply tell them what I know. Really? The environment matters and when it comes to food our environment sucks. But don’t touch it, we says, that’s socialism. Guess what happens when teachers create an environment of true learning, developing a relationship with the students in the room, getting creative, not lecturing? Students learn. Guess what happens when children’s consumption of soda is limited? They lose weight. Guess what happens when the limits are taken away. They gain weight. Funny.

“It (research study) suggests that if we want long term changes in bodyweight, we will need to make long term, permanent changes in the environment for children,” says David Ludwig, author of a recent study on sugary drinks. Let me add to Dr. Ludwig’s thoughts, changing one word, if we want long term changes in bodyweight, we will need to make long term, permanent changes in the environment for adults. Yes, even as adults we can’t outwit our environment when it comes to food. We have a problem with food. We need regulation, bans on double big gulps and the like. Sincerely, we do.

I have found one place that takes my best interests in food environment to heart, my fitness center.  Here is the sign I ran into just this morning:

 

Good to know I can find healthy food.  Oops, then I walked ten feet to my right and looked in the darkened cafe of said fitness center.  This is what I saw:

 

Maybe this is what my fitness center meant by cage free and organic.  Can a supplement or an energy bar be truly cage free?  If it’s here, it’s healthy, and if it’s here, grab a supplement.  Things that make you go hmmmm.

Finally, it’s Friday and we need a food rule. Harkening back to yesterday’s post here’s the rule as we head to the weekend: Don’t buy baked goods at Walgreen’s.  That’s why we have bakeries.  Don’t want to go to the bakery for your cookies?  Good, then don’t eat the cookies.  My daughter told me that once.

That’s all. Happy Friday.

11.

September 21, 2012
Behavior Change, Exercise, Food Descriptives, Food Environment, Food Rules
Leave a Comment

11. That is the number of ads related to nutrition and food that I see on the 100 foot walk from my car, past the front desk, and into the locker room at my fitness center. Or at least that’s how many we’re present today. Plus or minus on any given day. A small sampling:

Must be something about pushups that appeals to people.

The other day I discussed the University of Copenhagen study that supposedly demonstrated that if you exercise for 60 minutes you become less active and eat more throughout your day compared to exercising for 30 minutes. I suggested this may be partially explained by learned behavior. I am so bombarded with messages about nutrition while I exercise I have a hard time ignoring them. “Optimize in 45″ is the latest theme at my fitness center, enforcing the idea that I need to refuel within 45 minutes of wrapping up my workout. “Grab a protein shake, perhaps a smoothie. In a hurry? Use the machine. You must do something, your workout is meaningless if you don’t,” is the message, and equally important is the signal to buy it there, just go to the cafe where they can help you out. Argh.

I don’t doubt that 60 minutes of exercise allows people to sit more and eat more though out the day. However, it’s not just physiological, it’s psychological. From rationalizing the behavior because of the long workout to falling victim to the marketing, the mind is a powerful player. Layer on top of this that some people are addicted to food and there goes consumption after we workout.

Every ten feet I am told to think nutrition, to eat something. To optimize. To get ready for tomorrow’s exercise. To prepare for today’s exercise. To combat the afternoon snoozes. Seems to me, according to my fitness center, I should be eating all the time. “Have a meeting? Grab a protein laced coffee. Driving to your next appointment? Fuel up with bar, they can be eaten with one hand. Just hanging out in your office? Gobble up a ‘no need for a reason’ energy shake.” No wonder the aforementioned study demonstrated consumption went up with more exercise. We are told that the longer, the harder, we workout, the more we need food. And that we need it now. By the time you get out the door you had better have swallowed 300 calories of you’re screwed.

Refuel. Recharge. Optimize. But what if you simply walked for 30 minutes on the treadmill? A wonderful workout, however, you needn’t refuel upon finishing. If I grabbed a 400 calorie bar under the guise of recovering, and I only burned 300 calories during that walk, one could argue that the exercise just caused me to gain weight. Recovery nutrition is key, when you need it. You will get no argument from me there. Nutrition in every sense of the word is vitally important to the success of elite athletes. Agreed. However, I have yet to read a study that shows a typical workout at the local fitness center requires appropriate refueling strategies. We simply are not exercising hard enough or long enough.

In a few minutes I’ll wrap up my workout and walk the gauntlet from the exercise floor to the locker room to the car. I’ll do my best to dodge the hype of food. I’ll duck here, dodge there. Ill be told to “Evolve.”

Invariably I will get hit. Perhaps I’ll succumb to the last reminder, plastered on the exit door, telling me to optimize. Whew, already out the door.   I’ll just go grab some breakfast:

 

It’s Friday and here comes the food rule:

Don’t do it.  Don’t recover, refuel, optimize.  Don’t rationalize.  Ask yourself, do I really need this snack?  If the answer is an unqualified “yes,” go for it.  If not, walk away.  Just walk away. I know it is not that easy, but just think about it.  Actually think about it.  Don’t just eat because the incredibly lean man on the mirror in the fitness center tells you to.

Happy Friday.

For the birds

September 14, 2012
Behavior Change, Exercise, Food Rules, Scientific Studies
Leave a Comment

This one’s for the birds. The early bird gets the worm. Birds of a feather flock together. One in the hand is worth two in the bush. How many bird analogies exist? More than I care to imagine, no ornithology background here. Maybe I should talk to my math friend who studies swarming.   All of these analogies are appropriate in the context of an article to be published in next month’s Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, the official research journal of the American College of Sports Medicine.  The article is previewed in the Stone Hearth Newsletter.

The purpose of the completed research was to determine how moderate to vigorous exercise in the morning influenced thoughts about, and consumption of, food later in the day. In this case, the early bird skips the worm and leaves it for those who are still sleeping. Nice bird. Researchers at BYU had 35 women (18 of normal weight and 17 clinically obese) exercise for 45 minutes on two separate occasions. They all exercised early in the morning and were on a treadmill. All the subjects then had their brains interviewed (ie, brain activity was measured while they looked at images of food and flowers, where the flowers served as a control). Finally, their consumption was tracked throughout the day.

Interestingly women, when they exercised, demonstrated lower brain activity when shown images of food. This occurred regardless of their body weight. These early rising and exercising women were simply less interested in, and less motivated by, food. Hallelujah!  I need some of that.  And the effect of the morning exercise lingered throughout the day as the exercising women did not consume more food when compared to the non-exercise day. This is key. At times we rationalize our food consumption through exercise, as if to say, “I worked out this morning, I deserve this Kit Kat.” Didn’t happen in this study. Good news. This result was independent of bodyweight, the women of normal weight didn’t consume more nor did the obese women.

The study was small, 45 participants, but yet the results are exciting. If morning exercise does influence food motivation and consumption, it’s time to set the alarm to “Gym thirty.” I’m not sure how or why exercise exerts this influence, but one thought is that morning exercise simply makes us feel good. We are emboldened for the day. “Hey everybody, I got up early and worked out. While you were sleeping. I did that! I’m proud of myself! I feel great!” and if you feel like that at 7:00 am then maybe you feel empowered to make better choices throughout the rest of the day. The impact of exercise snowballs. And that 8:00 am meeting with Joe, no problem.

It’s Friday and that means food rule. We’re keeping today’s theme and going exercise, you know what’s coming:

Set you’re clock to gym thirty, as in gym:30. Seriously, give morning exercise a shot. If it’s not you, well at least your tried. Ultimately we need to exercise when we can and at a time that is sustainable, but give it a try. For years while I was growing up my mother rose bright and early and walked Zeke around the lake in Worthington, MN. She’d be back from her 5 mile excursion before my sisters and I awoke. She felt wonderful. Zeke was our dog, he felt good too. I could tell.

Happy Friday.

Setting the mood…

September 7, 2012
Food Environment, Food Rules
Leave a Comment

…the mood for food. “A change in fast food restaurant ambience can effect the amount of food consumed by customers, an unusual study has found,” said Nicholas Bakalar earlier this week in the New York Times. You don’t say?

Mr. Bakalar summarizes a recent research study published in Psychological Reports led by Brian Wansink of Cornell and Koert van Ittersum of the Georgia Institute of Technology. I’m not sure the study is all that unusual in the sense that ambience has been studied extensively in regards to eating. However, a crucial finding did surprise me. We’ll get to that.

Taking a Hardee’s restaurant and giving it ambience is no easy feat. Thickburger anyone? Kudos Dr. von Ittersum, well done. A section of said Hardee’s was decorated with indirect lighting, soft music, white tablecloths, candles, and was soundproofed from the rest of the Champaign, IL burger joint. The menu remained untouched. Fine dining anyone? Walk your Thickburger this way.

Customers entered, placed their orders as usual, and were randomly assigned to the newly renovated section or the traditional area with its harsh lighting, louder music, and oh so comfortable booths. Food selection was tracked. As in “You’re being watched.” Not surprisingly food selection did not differ by group, why would it? Customers weren’t yet aware they were subjects in a research project. Think it hit any of them when they were ushered into a soundproof room? That’s giving a lot of credit to the dining public. I can only hope.

Here is what the researchers found:

The experimental group, those subjects eating with ambience, spent 4.7% more time eating while eating 86% of the food ordered. The poor traditional booth group ate 95% of food ordered.

Ambience people consumed an average of 775 calories per meal, no Thickburgers in this group. The booth group, 950 calories. Want fries with that?

The ambience people rated their food more highly and left more satisfied.

Eating environment matters. Atmosphere causes changes in our behavior around food. Nothing new here. However, the finding that surprised me is the key one, the fact that the group eating off white tablecloths by candlelight actually ate less. This group obviously did not feel the need, the need for speed (thanks Mav, thanks Goose). They sat longer, yet ate almost 200 calories less than the traditional group. “You create a nice atmosphere, people talk more, they concentrate less on the food, and they leave the place more satisfied,” said Dr. von Ittersum. Agreed. However, there is quite a bit of research that says concentration helps limit our consumption by maintaining an awareness of what is being inserted into our mouths and that more time spent sitting at the table equates to an increase in consumption. If the food is there, and you’re there too, it’ll get eaten. If you build it, they will come. (One can learn a lot about life by watching Kevin Costner films. Forget Waterworld and all those Razzies for a moment).

As I’ve thought this through I have come up with two ideas. 1), the subjects caught on, alerted to the study by being directed into a soundproofed room with soft music and mood lighting, and thus knew they were being watched. Ever eat less because you were being watched? Or 2), they actually did eat less, unaware of the science around them. Back to giving the dining public credit.

This is the beauty of science. The authors discuss how their findings are in contrast to a hypothesized U shaped curve in regards to time spent at the table and consumption (i.e., people who spend more time eat more). What can we most definitely take from the present study is that we can be tricked rather easily into changing our consumption patterns and that replication in research yields more questions than answers, and that is wonderful. The consuming human is a complex creature.

Thus we end our first week of September. Kids across the country are back to school and their parents have returned to the spa. Time for this week’s food rule:

When eating at an establishment of fine dining, like your local Hardee’s franchise, bring your own pint glass, and make it a straight one, no curves. Ok, leave Hardee’s out of it, just keep the standard pint glass. Trust me, you’ll enjoy that lager even more. You’ll provide economic relief to your wallet and you will no longer be made fun of.

Happy Friday.

Constipation

August 31, 2012
Exercise, Food Environment, Food Rules
Leave a Comment

I have a few reasons to be constipated today, most notably from all the wind coming out of the southeastern United States.  That’s another story.  However, in terms of be constipated, a new drug has been approved to help people that chronically suffer from this.  This drug is called Linzess, I have no idea of how they name drugs.  Did they mean “Bizness”, that would seem more appropriate.  Reading the article or more aptly the title of the article in this morning’s paper got me thinking about doing a quick scan of this morning’s papers, wondering, and asking why.  First, from the New York Times:

Constipation Drug is Approved

Now, wouldn’t you think a drug to encourage people to do their business would be called an anti-constipation drug?  Just wondering.  Check out this graphic  from NPR’s Planet Money Blog about what Americans do during the day, maybe this is what’s causing our backed upness.   We need to play more sports

Sticking with New York Times, an interview with the Food Network’s Robert Irvine.  Don’t know him, but he seems to enjoy exercise:

What’s Your Workout?  A Food Star’s Fitness Plan

I have no problem with a food star telling the nation about his exercise regimen.  We need more of that.  But Mr. Irvine sums up his fitness accumen with this statement:

“I think the best way to lift weights is to do light weights and lots of repetitions. I do one body part a day. Normally chest followed by back, shoulders, biceps and then triceps. I very rarely do legs because I do cardio about 20 minutes every day. So I try not to do too many leg workouts other than running. I also like the elliptical machine.”

I’m glad he lifts weights, again, another thing we need to do more of.  I’m even proud of the fact that he doesn’t lift heavy things, he is 47 for Pete’s sake.  47 year olds shouldn’t be lifting heavy things.  It’s the last two sentences that strike me.  ”I rarely do legs…”  Mr. Irvine, with all due respect, ever met a runner with a leg injury?  Why might that happen, they run?  Alot.  Could it be because their legs, core, and abs are a bit weak?  I’ll seek out Mr. irvine for my next dinner party but not my next workout.

Onward to the Minnesota State Fair (How could we avoid it?) and the Star Tribune’s headlines:

Consider this after a long week at the fair

I actually like this one because it most likely was a long week at the fair.  Extreme heat and loads of food equals long week.  After waxing eloquent about the price of food and the amount of carbs one can consumer, James Lileks states:

“Suggestion, then, for a new stand: HARDLY MUCH OF ANYTHING! Small portions of everything at the fair. A bag of three mini donuts. A sack of French fries you could mail with one first-class stamp. An elephant ear that did not appear to be a 1:1 replica of an actual elephant ear. Cinnamon buns that cannot be mistaken for an ottoman. Charge twice as much for a fourth of the portion, and you’ll make a fortune.

I’m serious. It’s getting to the point where deep-fried watermelon is next and you’ll get a 10-pound object you have to put in a sling around your neck to eat. The “About a Yard Long Hot Dog” is inevitable, too, sold with beer in 32-gallon drums on wheels and a garden hose.”

Wouldn’t it be great if you could buy three mini-donuts or two cookies?  Can you go to the fair and not eat?  When did Minnesotans fascination with terrible food at the State Fair begin?  Anyone? Bueller?  Ever wonder why the majority of us associate the State Fair with food and are powerless against it’s grab?  Hint:  Think habit.

Lest you think the Great Minnesota Get Together is the only bastion of poor food, look what we left behind in Iraq:

Fast Food in Post War Iraq

Seems one of our lasting legacies, aside from being greeted as “liberators” (Thanks, Mr. Cheney) is fast food.  You’ve got to love this quote found on the opinion pages of the Star Trib:

“Indeed, ‘Kentucky’ has become the generic name for American-style fried chicken, which Iraqis pack away by the bucketload.”

I know I equate Iraqi food with Colonel Sanders.  Interesting.  A quote from the owner of a traditional Iraqi dining establishment in Baghdad:

“Sometimes we need ‘Kentucky.’ Not just fish, fish, fish.”

He’s got that right, sometimes we need Kentucky.  I think in the United States the quote is reversed, as if to say, “Sometimes we need fish.  Not Kentucky, Kentucky, Kentucky.”

And finally, it seems that even students at Harvard cheat:

Harvard undergrads accused of cheating

Has absolutely nothing to do with the food, just found it funny.  Gasp.  Harvard students cheat?  No.  I’ll have to ask some of Harvard alum friends if they ever travelled down that path.

And really finally, it’s Friday, and we need a new food rule.  We missed last week, so here we go:

Invite Clint Eastwood’s imaginary friend over for dinner.  When he or she shows up, you’ll still be the only one in the room and that means you’ll eat less.  Who knows, maybe you can even carry on a coherent conversation.

 

 

 

 

 

May the force be with you

August 10, 2012
Behavior Change, Children, Food Descriptives, Food Environment, Food Rules
Leave a Comment

New Federal Rules Require Student to Take Fruits and Veggies This Fall.  Upon reading this article posted on the MPR website some people went off the rails.  Check out the comments on MPR’s Facebook page.  Some make sense, others don’t.  The guidelines state that smaller portions of protein will be doled along with greater portions fruit and vegetables.   The MPR story phrases it this way, “That means smaller portions of meat and protein, fewer calories and a new requirement that forces students to take more fruits and vegetables.”  I’m sure it’s that word “forces” that irks some people.  Some of the posted comments:

“Parents who raise their children with fruits and veggies as a normal part of the diet — parents who eat them, that is — have kids who like fruits and vegetables.”

“Will french fries still count as their daily vegetable portion? There was a dedicated burger and fries line every day at my MN high school.”

“Only a matter of time before the .gov will dictate what you HAVE to eat too.”

“Perhaps raising the quality of food would help as well. All I remember from school was how the food was always questionable as to whether it was healthy to eat at all.”

I like the idea that schools are taking a good long look at what they are serving, especially to younger kids.  850 calories for high school kids and 650 for younger ones is a good stab at portion control.  Fewer calories in meat and protein?  All the fruits and veggies you can eat?  Many questions abound here.  It is very hard to dictate individual dietary needs through mass rules.  Thinking of a high school athlete they may need more than those 850 calories and an apple to get what they need.  That being said, this is a good place to start.

The biggest question remains for me however.  So what if students are “forced” to follow the new guidelines and must take less protein and more fruit.  This in no way ensures they will eat it.  As one Facebook commenter stated, “are the schools also going to sit there and watch the kids eat them like I do at dinner time?”  My guess is that older students won’t readily accept the new changes while younger kids will quickly adapt.  An elementary student will have a more difficult time distinguishing between the size of the present hamburger bun and the one circa spring 2012.

Upon making it to the end of the MPR article I raised my arms and rejoiced:

“Lukkonen is telling school officials that the first year of the new requirements might be tough. She suspects that that middle and high school students will protest the most over the new smaller bread and meat portions, and the forced vegetable and fruit servings.

But Lukkonen is confident that younger students, especially those just starting school, won’t know lunchtime any other way and will grow into fruit and vegetable connoisseurs in coming years.”

Habits start young.  Younger students won’t know any different, little fruit and vegetable connoisseurs.  Perfect.  I still have nightmares about the lunches served at West Elementary in Worthington, MN.  Maybe that’s my issue.

Finally, it’s Friday and that means new food rule:

Pack your kids lunch.  If you really want to ensure your kids are eating healthy, or at least being put in a good position to eat healthy (they can still throw away your food or trade up, or down as the case may be), buy a cool new lunch box and create their lunch with their input.  Do they still make metal lunchboxes adorned with comic figures?  So much cooler than a modern Built variety.  And in elementary school who doesn’t want to be cool?

Happy Friday.

When kids cry

July 6, 2012
Food Descriptives, Food Environment, Food Rules
Leave a Comment

The current issue of Entertainment Weekly reminded me that 28 years ago this week Prince’s “When Doves Cry” was the #3 song on the pop charts.  Also reminded me that I am aging.  There was Prince just ahead of Billy Idol and Huey Lewis and just behind Duran Duran.  Oh yes, 1984 it was.  It has been an ’80s week here at Salient Dictates, first Heart and now Prince.  I’m standing against a wall in my junior high cafeteria once again.

Speaking of crying, how many police officers do you think it takes to make multiple children under the age of 7 cry?  One.  If you happen to live in Apple Valley, MN and have a few fireworks on the 4th of July.  That’s right, some police officer stopped my brother-in-law mid show on Wednesday and took what she thought were all his fireworks.  The children wept openly yet the police officer didn’t relent, she gathered up those incredibly dangerous sparklers, a bunch of cans that spewed colorful sparks for a grand total of 6 seconds, and a couple of things that go boom.  This in the midst of real cannon like booms just over yonder.  Talk about doves crying.

Here’s what we should all be crying about:

Did you like that transition? Minute Maid Lemonade.  This bottle happened to be sitting on the table (the one of yesterday’s magnetic field fame) on July 4th.  Read the label closely.  Just below the USA Olympic Rings.  ”Put Good in.  Get Good Out.”  Thank you Minute Maid, you not only sponsor the Olympics but you give me good things to drink!  I feel so good now, thanks for giving me so much goodness.

Now, go just to the left of that, and below the nutrition label.  Yes, there it is, the ingredients list.  $10 to anyone who can tell me what the following are:

Natural Flavors, Potassium Citrate, Glycerol Ester of Rosin, Modified Corn Starch, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Aspartame, Acesulfame Potassium.

If you are a chemist, you can’t claim the $10.  Since when did HFCS become good?  And yes, i did forget about all the goodness of aspartame.  Yummy.  So good it makes my brain swell.  Literally.  It’s getting bigger as we speak.

“Put Good In.  Get Good Out.” strikes me as a bit odd.  An interesting connection here:  Also on the 4th of July, my brother-in-law had me take a quick 10 question quiz on the Affordable Healthcare Act (aka Obamacare).   After I completed the quiz, I received my score (10/10, thank you), and was given statistics on how others did.  Seems that people who don’t know anything about the law are against it and those that know something about the law are for it.  Across all demographics. Things that make you go hmmmm.  Same thing with lemonade.  I like lemonade and if I took Minute Maid at face value, I’d feel good about drinking it.  But the more questions I ask, the more aware I become, the less I like that lemonade in particular.  Will I drink it if it is placed in front of me?  Probably.  (Damn Higgs Boson thingy) but at least I am doing so willfully.  We all have our vices.  The point is be careful of marketing and especially of taglines when it comes to food.

In discussion with my mother the other day regarding last week’s report on low carb diets, she asked “Well then, what can I eat?”  Such a great question, and it leads me to today’s food rule.  It’s Friday, and here we go:

Today, eat only foods without labels.  Seriously, give it a try.  Apples don’t have labels.  We know what’s in them.  Apple.  Same with oranges, broccoli, and carrots.  Last night my partner made an incredible beet salad.  Who knew I liked beets so much!  And for our 4 month old, try some more breast milk.  The last time I checked breasts didn’t have food labels either.  Must be good for kids.  Minute Maid lemonade?  Not so much.

Happy Friday.

Nike town

June 29, 2012
Behavior Change, Exercise, Food Rules
Leave a Comment

On a recent trip to my partner’s parent’s home we drove along a quiet highway in south east Wisconsin. Evening time, sun setting, rolling hills. And hot, hot, hot. As we came over a hill we saw a woman walking. In her workout gear she was obviously walking for exercise. Good to see.

This woman was overweight, she looked warm and she looked tired. Yet she was doing it. She was walking. She was exercising. My guess is that this was the last thing she wanted to be doing at that moment, slogging up a hill in the heat in the rolling hills of Wisconsin. Or maybe it’s where she truly wanted to be. Maybe a place she needed to be. For her. Maybe she came to a place in her mind that begged her to go for a walk. To get healthier. Maybe she found that place deep inside her that said, “Go for a walk, I know it’s late, but do it. One step at a time.”

The more I think about it that woman probably did want to be there. Good for you, Ms. Lady Walking up the Wisconsin Hills. I’ll,never know your name but I’m incredibly proud of you.

And that leads to today’s food rule, borrowing from Nike:

Just do it. Go for a walk, eat a carrot, call a friend. Do something for your health. Today. If only for today. Start.

Happy Friday.

Little kids suck

June 22, 2012
Behavior Change, Food Rules
Leave a Comment

Or at least they sincerely enjoy their vegetables pureed and served with a straw.  Gotcha with the title, eh?  Yesterday I mentioned I like squeezing more than sucking when it comes to my water bottle during workouts.  Seems as if children enjoy sucking too.  Makes sense, they come out of the womb knowing how to do it.

Now that I think about it, I find it hard to believe that it took someone so long to market this.  Parents have been blending food for eons in order to get their kids to eat.  All they needed to do was through it in a Zip-Loc bag, plug a straw in, and bam, you have a $53 million company.  Plum Organics is leading the charge in food pouches and whether you agree or disagree, they are hot.

In the article published yesterday in the New York Times, Matt Richtel talks about the immense (and growing) popularity of these food pouches.  Kids love them, parents love them when the time is right.  Give kids control, let them eat when they are hungry, and free range parenting are terms thrown around in the article.  There are many ways to go on this topic and Mr. Richtel points out a big issue: less mealtimes as a family.  That would be an extreme.  We’ve bought the applesauce version from Trader Joe’s and our daughter loves them.  Read the article, I’ll comment next week.

And when someone says it best, there is no need to say it again.  Two more articles in today’s Times that I couldn’t hope to summarize as they both say what needs to be said:

How can a big gulp look so small?

Dirtying up our diets.

And today is Friday,  so food rule time, here we go:

Suck every once in awhile.  I mean it.  Truly let yourself suck.  If you want to drink more water, suck.  Find a squeezeable clear bottle and have at it.  You’ve had the skill your entire life, heck, your an expert. A professional!  Take that skill and run with it.  Just don’t fill your squeeze bottle up with beer.  At least not before noon. On a Saturday.

Happy Friday.

Luke

June 15, 2012
Barriers to Exercise, Exercise, Food Rules
Leave a Comment

Luke got me thinking this morning.  No, not Darth Vader’s son, but rather the late Tim Russert’s son, Luke Russert.  Seems he is following in dad’s footsteps in the news realm and was guest hosting “Way too Early” on MSNBC this morning.

The show’s regular anchor, Willie Geist, does an excellent job of keeping his viewers awake and engaged.  And I must say young Luke (not ready to call him Skywalker yet) did a nice job filling in.  He made a comment near the middle of show as they went to break: “And for those of you exercising this morning, go faster during the commercials.”  I started to think of framing and how we say things in regards to exercise.

Yesterday I had students in a class I teach complete 20 minutes of high intensity interval training.  They had two options:  Go hard for 30 seconds, recover for 30 seconds, and repeat 20 times or go hard for 15 seconds, recover for 45 seconds, and repeat 20 times.  The difference in the two is the intensity.  You can go harder for 15 seconds than you can for 30.  I encouraged and challenged them to truly put the pedal down when they were supposed to.  Red faces abounded.  Some pride showed up too.  There was the inevitable “Those were the longest 30 seconds of my life” comments hanging about, but for the most part the students felt good about what they had accomplished.

Rather than framing yesterday’s exercise as High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) which sounds scary in and of itself, what if I had followed Luke’s advice and said, “Go faster during the commercials.”  Classic.  Setting the stage and expectations without scaring them.  Defining the terms without needless anxiety.  I am ready to call Mr. Russert “Skywalker” now.  A bit like Occam’s razor, sometimes the best answer is the simplest.  Afraid of high intensity exercise?  I won’t tell you that you are doing it, I will simply tell you to go faster during the commercials.  I won’t tell you that you are doing a good ab workout by acting as if you are putting on a tight pair of pants (sucking in your gut and standing tall) ten times a time, rather I will simply tell you to act like you are putting on a tight pair of jeans ten times a day.

Today is Friday and that means it’s Food Rule Day.  Being that Luke set the stage for us so nicely this a.m., let’s go with it:

Go faster through the commercials.  A metaphor for life as well.  Get past the junk, the difficult stuff, so that you can enjoy the rest.  Watch television if you must, but make it worth your while.

Finally, Happy Father’s Day to those dads out there.  Nothing is better than being “daddy.” You have my permission to have an extra cookie.  Enjoy.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 133 other followers

%d bloggers like this: